Government efforts to eliminate the commercial use of a radioactive material deemed a security risk have run into opposition from the medical sector.
The Obama administration announced earlier this year that it would work to phase out commercial applications of a number of radioactive substances that could be used to build a so-called “dirty bomb.” Such a weapon would use conventional explosives to disperse poisonous radioactive material over a wide area.
Among the common commercial substances targeted for elimination is cesium chloride. The government is trying to convince hospitals and blood banks in the country to cease using irradiator machines that contain cesium chloride and instead use X-ray irradiators to make sure blood is safe for transfusion. The government is weighing using grants and other inducements to encourage the move away from cesium chloride irradiators, unidentified officials and specialists told the Boston Globe for a Monday article.
In addition to being extremely radioactive, cesium chloride is also dissolvable in water. These characteristics make the material “a greater concern than other radiation sources,” according to a 2008 finding by the National Research Council.
However, some medical professionals and companies are resisting the urged change on the grounds that the newer X-ray irradiators are too expensive and more prone too breaking down.
“X-ray irradiators break with regular abandon, so of course you have to buy two,” said Jed Gorlin, vice president of medical and quality affairs at Innovative Blood Resources in St. Paul, Minn.
Miles Pomper, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, said that financial motives are a significant contributing factor to the resistance.
“There are going to be winners and losers,” Pomper said. “The people who only make cesium chloride aren’t going to like it.”
What We're Following See More »
The Commission on Presidential Debates put out a statement today that gives credence to Donald Trump's claims that he had a bad microphone on Monday night. "Regarding the first debate, there were issues regarding Donald Trump's audio that affected the sound level in the debate hall," read the statement in its entirety.
"A video of Donald Trump testifying under oath about his provocative rhetoric about Mexicans and other Latinos is set to go public" as soon as today. "Trump gave the testimony in June at a law office in Washington in connection with one of two lawsuits he filed last year after prominent chefs reacted to the controversy over his remarks by pulling out of plans to open restaurants at his new D.C. hotel. D.C. Superior Court Judge Brian Holeman said in an order issued Thursday evening that fears the testimony might show up in campaign commercials were no basis to keep the public from seeing the video."
No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."
"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."